checkAlerts

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of conveying safety and behavior. 'Check' and 'Identifies' imply a read-only diagnostic operation, and 'configurable thresholds' adds useful behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state that no changes are made, what the response contains, or how alerts are presented.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two focused sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the main action, and the second provides concrete alert examples, so each sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a five-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but not fully complete. It does not mention the return shape, empty-alert behavior, or when to prefer this over sibling insight tools, though the schema fully documents parameters and defaults.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has clear descriptions with defaults and units. The description adds only the conceptual notion of configurable thresholds and alert categories, not additional semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Check campaigns for performance alerts' and names concrete alert categories like high CPR and low CTR. It is unambiguous about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling analytics tools such as getInsights.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like getInsights or compareTwoPeriods. The description implies a threshold-based alert use case but provides no exclusions, prerequisites, or selection criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.